Like how easily a passport was found to pick out an enemy. The countless training exercises that day. The fact that the Pentagon plane impact was
obviously a lie. The offices that burned. Most importantly, the fact that any and all jets capable of responding to the attack were conviently to far
away, TRAINING! ...

On the street, standing in a shower of office paper and the siding from the building, he found a piece of paper. It was an airliner's itinerary,
listing information about a flight from Boston to Los Angeles.

Along with the letter was a note: ''To whom it may concern. This was found floating around the street in downtown New York. I am sorry if you suffered
any loss in this tragedy. Sincerely, a friend in New York!''

There is so many more obvious inconsistencies than the towers falling themself.

You just don't want to believe that the US was caught flatfooted.
They did simple research and executed a simple plan.
It worked pure and simple.

That guy in the Colorado movie theater had a simple plan.
Timothy McVeigh had a simple plan.

Haven't you ever heard that the simplest plans are the best ones?
To believe this conspiracy means you have to believe in one of the most complex plans out there.
How often does 'complex' and 'US government' go together?

A failing internal support structure and even a floor collapsing would certainly shake the upper portion of the building. From this video, it
certainly doesn't show any stress being exerted on the upper outside walls. Considering the majority of this building structure was a skeletal
outside frame, any support failure should have been noticed with some kind of exterior wall movement.

A 110 floor structure whose support structure is weakened on its top floors does not topple symmetrically down to it's footprint without the
foundation supports being compromised. The foundations supports would have to be sheared at the same exact time to get the type of collapse we saw
with both buildings. The pancake theory doesn't work considering the majority of the lower floors were not compromised. Were not even taking into
account the equation that steel doesn't melt a 1500 degrees!

You ignore the basic fact that steel buildings don't completely collapse like this in a fire. Let alone 1 collapsing in under 1 hour and the second
building collapsing in a little more than 1 1/2 hours. It only took 30 seconds for the complete collapse!! We than have a 3rd steel building
collapsing. That structural frame of building 7 was not even the same as the twin towers..... hmmm.

...and you wan to believe the official story? Do some research on the integrity of steel buildings. and why they don't collapse in fires.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
A 110 floor structure whose support structure is weakened on its top floors does not topple symmetrically down to it's footprint without the
foundation supports being compromised.

You are factually wrong on every count. How do we know this? Because we've seen it happen right there.

You're either not understanding the structure of these buildings, or you're deliberately ignoring the reality to suit your desire for explosives
supposedly being used.

The towers were constructed around a concrete core, the weight of each floor being suspended in place by their attachment to that and an outside
wall.

The outside wall and the internal core were BOTH damaged in the attack, in each building. Therefore, the structure of these buildings above the impact
point failed.

Each floor is ONLY DESIGNED TO HOLD A CERTAIN WEIGHT.

So, when you have ten floors suddenly collapse through failure onto a floor only designed to hold a fraction of that weight, it collapses onto the
floor beneath.

This then collapses onto the floor beneath that.

That floor then collapses...

It's additional weight being added to each floor with each collapse of the floor above, resulting in a "PANCAKE EFFECT"

All the conspiracy theorists just keep on ignoring this fact. Each floor was designed to hold the weight of itself, not the weight of ten floors
collapsing onto it. The weakest points then failed - the internal and outer supports keeping it in place.

When you have ten floors of weight collapse onto one floor, when that floor is only designed to support its own weight, and only with a stable outer
structure, of course it is going to collapse.

I really don't know how this can be explained to you people in any more simple a way. When a floor can only support ten tonnes, and you drop a hundred
tonnes onto it, IT'S GOING TO COLLAPSE.

You ignore the basic fact that steel buildings don't completely collapse like this in a fire. Let alone 1 collapsing in under 1 hour

You are basing your beliefs on a hunch.
If you can find another building that was hit with a 757 first and then survived an un-fought fire only to survive please show us.

While experiencing structural failure to the core of the building and the outside supporting structure, and with the weight of ten floors dropping
onto a floor only designed to support its own weight, then dropping onto another floor only designed to support its own weight, then dropping onto
another floor only designed...

This is what these people refuse to accept. These floors could not possibly maintain the weight falling onto them from above, and this is what led to
the pancake effect which led to both buildings collapsing. There was no need for explosives, no need for any elaborate conspiracy, no need for there
to be any more evil a plan than the one we saw enacted that day by terrorists.

Thee people will absolutely never accept the reality though, because to do so would mean admitting that they've wasted so much time and effort chasing
nonsense based on their own irrational theories and paranoias.

I'm not willing to definitively say I hear what could only be described as "demolition explosions" . . . however, in the first video, when it starts
looping the footage of the boom followed by the collapse of the building, in the very lower left of the falling building, there is a noticeable flash
of light when the boom is heard. Immediately after, the building starts to collapse on that side. It's not a small flash either. It's a bright white
ball of light right when the boom is heard, and right where the building starts to collapse. I'm just curious what everyone (skeptics and "truthers"
alike) think that flash is.

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
At least we have debunkers acknowledging that they hear timed explosions but try to dismiss it has floors pancaking . As you have stated the floors
fell at 10 floors per sec and not the timed explosives we hear in the video.

No, you don't have debunkers acknowledging that we hear timed explosions, you have debunkers stating that we hear impacts of the FLOORS HITTING EACH
OTHER, and the acceleration of those impacts as the FLOORS ADD MORE WEIGHT TO THE NEXT ONE CAUSING COLLAPSE.

What you think are explosions are nothing more than the sounds of impact, as one floor fails and hits the one beneath. This is not surprising, it's
not new, it's not "covered up" in any way. It's the sound you would EXPECT from one floor collapsing and hitting another in a vertical collapse of a
structure that has failed.

You keep pretending that this is some secret, that you've uncovered something, when all you're doing is hearing a car backfire and calling it a
gunshot.

Fundamental physics? Where is the delay when upper floors are striking lower floors? The fall has to be significantly impeded by the lower impacted
mass! It's called the "conservation of momentum" which is a fundamental law of physics! If the pancake theory can even be plausible, how do you
explain the 3rd building that wasn't even constructed in the same manner as the trade towers? I guess the pancake theory can be applied to that
building too?

You also say 10 floors suddenly collapse. So every girder support on each floor coincidently sheared at the same time? I can now say you're
deliberately trying to justify the pancake theory

.

As far as why I come to this conclusion...I teach architectural and mechanical CAD. I have local architects who sit on my advisory board. We've
discussed the collapse at length. Everyone of these architects didn't buy the pancake theory. The upper floors simply did not meet any resistance.
I don't claim to be an authority on this, but when architects don't agree, it raises a red flag.

No, I'm not basing this on a hunch. I base it on the perspective of architects on my architectural and mechanical CAD advisory committee. The floors
falling did not meet any resistance. That's a physical impossibility. Even if each floor could only hold it's own weight, it has no bearing on the
resistance given on the bottom floors whose supports were not compromised. Simply put, if the floors were meeting any kind of resistance, it
definitely wouldn't have collapsed in 30seconds.

originally posted by: Voyager1
In the second video I hear 5 explosions starting at 15:36 and ending at 15:41. Thanks for the vid Shadow Herder.

For those who can't hear it try cranking up some head phones, there are unmistakable explosions going on, real and very loud.

Thank you for listening, you along with many thousands of others hear explosion others try to pass it off as floors crashing but that has been proven
not possible as 10 floors per sec doesn't sound like controlled explosions. well timed lasts.

these topics make me nervous because of what has happened to me in the past..
but..

So we have firefighters and witnesses who were in the tower that state the heard and saw massive explosions. Then you have arm chair basement
dwelling debunkers attempting to change what these rescue workers said and meant. Deplorable.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.